Report: Kansas hospitals hire lobbyist to push Medicaid expansion

Topeka  The Kansas Hospital Association has hired a former Republican cabinet secretary to develop a plan for expanding Medicaid that the group hopes Gov. Sam Brownback and the GOP-led Kansas Legislature can support.

According to a report by the KHI News Service, the hospital association has hired Mike Leavitt, who served as Health and Human Services Secretary under President George W. Bush, to develop a plan similar to plans already adopted in Iowa and Arkansas.

"We ought to as a state be having a conversation about whether we can come up with a plan like that and the reality is that conversation just hasn't happened yet," KHA president and CEO Tom Bell was quoted as saying.

The federal Affordable Care Act originally called for expanding Medicaid to include everyone with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level. That's $15,856 a year for a single individual, or $26,951 for a family of three.

The U.S. Supreme Court later ruled, however, that since Medicaid is a joint state-federal program, Congress could not mandate such an expansion, but could only make it optional for states.

The federal government will pay 100 percent of the cost of the expansion for the first three years, starting in 2014, and gradually reduce its share to 90 percent of the cost.

Kansas is among 22 states that so far have not opted to take part in the expansion.

Kansas also has one of the strictest eligibility standards for its Medicaid program, now known as KanCare. The income limit for a family of three is $5,148 a year, or about 26 percent of the poverty level. Working-age adults without children are not eligible.

Iowa and Arkansas, which are both led by Republican governors, have adopted plans that will use the new federal funds to help purchase private health insurance for those newly-eligible individuals.

The Kansas Health Institute, the parent organization of KHI News Service, estimates that 85,300 Kansans who are currently uninsured would gain coverage through the expansion.

So far, Brownback has not proposed taking advantage of the expansion, but also has not stated publicly that he opposes it.

"I've not declared a position on it because you're seeing the federal government adjust monthly, Obamacare," Brownback told reporters earlier this month. "They may adjust this one."

But KHA's Bell said Kansas is turning away money by not taking part in the expansion.

"Beginning in 2014 we will, in effect, be sending some of our tax dollars to states that have expanded Medicaid," Bell said.

Let's get this right, the federal government will pay the bill for a couple years ans then ask states to pick up10% of the Medicaid coat. And we are expected to believe the federal government will meet their obligation to pay their share rather than dumping even more of the cost of Medicaid on the Kansas taxpayer. I would like just one example in modern history of our federal govenment where they have kept any funding promise? Seriously we are 17 trillion in debt for starters. Keep drinking the coolaid.

OK, Dan, you are right about the "coolaid" and you are imbibing a ton of the stuff.

First, there is no earthly reason that we as a state can not take advantage of the federal dollars as long as they keep coming, rather than summarilly rejecting them on some "might-maybe" GOP talking point. The dollars will come in, they are already allocated and we are stupid to not take advantage of getting our tax dollars back.

Second, so what if the dollars ddry up later? Any thinking person will agree that, short of a suicide pact by the GOP (not at all impossible, considering the current crop of nay-sayers) ther will be dollars from the feds for the forseeable future to fund the program. So what if the percentage drops to 80 or 70 or whatever? The amount we need to spend as a state to fund the expansion will be less than what we are spending now and you think that's a bad idea? Under what illusion are you living that makes it sensible to you to leave the state responsible for the entire tab, or to just ignore the need for an expanded medicaid in Kansas?

Your parroting of the "Republican" line of poppy-cock is a symptom of the hatred of one party for another and not a thinking, rational reason for denying good medical care to those who least can afford it. Nice job.

The ER is not free, it is the most expensive way to obtain care for acute illness or injury. Your diabetesm CHF, COPD, cancer or autoimmune disease will bot be managed by the ER.
the patient is still responsible for the bill. they They have collections calling and calling, and if no results they will garnish your wages, your bank account or you home. This happens all the time. A patient of mine had her checking and savings account seized for ER bills. This has to stop, right now.